1. Request for Proposal 421909 591 MHz Power Amplifiers 6-05-2024.docx

Procurement & Property Management Division

P.O. Box 5000 Upton, NY 11973-5000 Phone 631 344-5281 Fax 631-344-4605 wkoncelik@bnl.gov

Managed by Brookhaven Science Associates for the U.S. Department of Energy www.bnl.gov

July 01, 2024 TO: Interested Offerors

SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) NO. 421909; 591 MHz RF Amplifiers Systems– Electron-Ion Collider (EIC)

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Brookhaven Science Associates, LLC (BSA), under Contract for the operation of Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), herewith solicits your proposal for 591 MHz RF Amplifier Systems. The EIC Project will require the design, build, and installation of the accelerator hardware for a new electron storage ring, an electron injector, and modifications to the existing hadron ring required to produce and operate the EIC. The EIC is being designed to meet requirements which will ensure high reliability and availability for the user program.

BSA supports DOE’s reporting requirements in that all its vendors/contractors are to be registered in the U. S. Government supplier database entitled System for Award Management (SAM). It is suggested that registration be performed online at sam.gov or by contacting the Service Desk at 1-866-606-8220 prior to the submission date of the resulting RFP. If you already have done so, provide a definitive statement herein that your firm is registered in SAM.

2.0 SCOPE of Work

The Offeror will be selected in accordance with the evaluation criteria set forth in this RFP. The resulting subcontract will be Firm Fixed Price (FFP) for the 591 MHz Amplifier Systems. Firms will be selected for negotiations based on a demonstrated competence and qualifications for the required work in accordance with the draft contract, Enclosure 1, including the Statement of Work for the 591 MHz RF Amplifier Systems, Doc No. EIC-RFS-SOW-010 (Rev. 03) dated May 30, 2024 and Technical Specification for the 591 MHz RF Amplifier Systems, Doc No. EIC-RFS-SPC-006 (Rev. 03) dated May 30, 2024.

BSA has established the following schedule for achieving evaluation, selection, approval, and award.

Clarification Questions Due Date Proposals Due July 26, 2024 August 05, 2024

3.2.1 A complete electronic proposal must be received by BSA no later than the 5pm EST on the due date noted above. Award is estimated to be made on or about the date as noted herein. Proposals, including their withdrawal or modification, received after the closing date shall be considered late. Proposals will be opened in private.

3.2.2 The Offeror will be required to submit a Technical Proposal (Volume 1) and a Price Proposal (Volume 2), and Enclosure 3 – AMS From 043 - Proposal Pricing Sheet referenced at the bottom of this RFP. One (1) electronic copy of the Technical Proposal and one (1) electronic copy of the Price Proposal are to be submitted. The Technical and Price Proposals shall be submitted as separate volumes and both volumes are to be submitted in English only. The proposals and all supporting relevant documentation which fully describes the proposed capability should be submitted electronically via email and the contents clearly identified. The email subject line shall read “BSA RFP Number 421909 591 MHz RF Amplifier Systems – Electron-Ion Collider (EIC) Project” emailed and addressed to:

William Koncelik

Procurement and Property Management Division Contact Information:

Telephone: (631) 344-5281 E-mail: wkoncelik@bnl.gov

Should an Offeror find any discrepancies in, or omissions from, any of the documents, or be in doubt as to the meaning of any document, the Offeror should immediately advise BSA by email to wkoncelik@bnl.gov, no later than five (5) business days prior to the proposal due date to allow time for responses to be received by all prospective Offerors. Oral explanations or instructions given before the award of a contract are discouraged and will not be binding. Any information given to a prospective Offeror concerning this RFP will be furnished to all other prospective Offerors as an amendment to the RFP if that information is deemed necessary by BSA to submitting proposals or if the lack of it would be prejudicial to other prospective Offerors.

The proposals shall be concise and clear in every instance and restricted to relevant information only. The response shall clearly and fully demonstrate the Offeror’s capability, knowledge, and experience regarding the technical requirements described herein. Stating that the Offeror understands and will comply with the technical requirements is not sufficient, nor is a simple affirmative restatement of the requirements. Similarly, phrases such as “standard procedures will be employed,” or “well-known techniques will be used,” without explanatory detail will be considered inadequate.

4.1.1 Disclosure of Proposals

Proposals provided to BSA in response to this RFP will not be disclosed except to appropriate BSA personnel and BSA subcontractor consultants involved in reviewing responses to this RFP, and/or U.S. Government personnel.

Offerors that include in their proposals data that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose, or used by BSA except for evaluation purposes, shall:

(1) Mark the title page with the following legend:

“This proposal includes data that shall not be disclosed except to appropriate BSA personnel, its subcontractor consultants involved in reviewing responses to the RFP, and/or U.S. Government personnel, and shall not be disclosed, in whole or in part, for any purpose other than to evaluate this proposal. If, however, a contract is awarded to this Offeror because of/or in connection with the submission of this data, BSA shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting contract. This restriction does not limit BSA’s right to use information contained in this data if it is obtained from another source without restriction. The data subject to this restriction are contained in sheets [insert numbers or other identification of sheets]”; and

(2) Mark each sheet of data that Offeror wishes to restrict with the following legend:

“Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on the title page of this proposal.”

4.2 Technical Proposal Volume 1

Provide an electronic file copy of the technical portion of your proposal and any amendments to this RFP. Offerors must provide specific detailed descriptions and capabilities for the main and sub-categories which support how the Offeror plans to perform the SOW. Do not include the Price Proposal in this volume. Volume 1 shall contain technical information only and shall be legible, clear, coherent, and individually tabbed (by section) in accordance with the sections noted below. Each proposal will be evaluated in accordance with the associated categories noted herein.

4.2.1 Tab 1 – General overall summary (0 points)

Tab 1 will consist of an overall general summary on how the Offeror plans to achieve the design, manufacture, testing, and delivery of the 591 MHz RF Amplifier Systems. This is a non-detailed overview and will not be point scored.

4.2.2 Tab 2 – Spec/ SOW compliance Matrix (0 points)

The Offeror shall provide a paragraph-by-paragraph compliance matrix for each section of the specification and Statement of Work that clearly shows the offerors acceptance.

A. Offerors shall list each Specification section by number and explain how they will comply with all requirements.

B. Offerors shall list each SOW section by number and explain how they will comply with all requirements. Detailed explanation of how compliance is to be achieved is required; a list of sections indicating compliance only is insufficient.

Any exceptions shall be clearly documented, and the offeror shall provide a detailed explanation why the exception is being taken and any alternative recommendations. While the compliance matrices will not be point scored, they will be used to evaluate the bidders understanding and compliance with the technical requirements and can influence the scoring on the following tabs.

4.2.3 Tab 3 – DESIGN AND TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES (50 points)

A. Design Overview Provide a brief description, with images and layout drawing(s) as well as calculations and simulations, of the conceptual design of the complete 591 MHz power amplifiers Engineering Test Units with emphasis on how the design will meet the technical specification.

B. Detailed Design of the RF-PA as outlined in the SOW (An RF-PA is the highest power gain stage and the last gain stage within the RF amplifier chain).

C. Stability Explain how the amplifier will be designed to be unconditionally stable as outlined in 3.1.2 of the technical specification.

D. RF Device Die Temperatures Describe, using calculations and/or simulations, how this design will limit the RF devices die temperatures will be limited to 130 deg.C (3.1.8 of the technical specification) E. Reliability Describe how the MBTF of 10000 hours of the full unit and 35000 of RF devices will be achieved (3.1.7 of the technical specification).

F. Redundant operation Describe how RF amplifier system can and will perform without shutting down in case of 10% of all RF-PA devices failed/inhibited (3.1.5 of the technical specification).

G. Power supplies Provide proposed model numbers of DC power supplies.

Evaluation method for Tab 3

The Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated on the completeness and adequacy of the overall conceptual design of the system and components with respect to: compliance with the technical specification, technical soundness and feasibility of the design.

4.2.4 Tab 4 – pRIOR EXPERIENCE AND PAST PERFORMANCE PRODUCING COMPARABLE POWER AMPLIFIERS (INCLUDING SUBCONTRACTORS) (25 Points)

A. Experience with and past performance producing comparable power amplifier systems (20)

· Identify how many years you have been designing, manufacturing, and testing power amplifiers, with an emphasis on prior experience with comparable frequencies and power levels. In addition, indicate the number of years of experience of your proposed key subcontractors and indicate your experience (years, number, and complexity of projects) working with all subcontractors you intend to include in your proposal.

· Provide a list of at least 3 projects of comparable or higher complexity from 3 separate customers that you have designed and built in the past ten (10) years, including the contact information of the owners of these power amplifier systems. For these projects please also provide:

· A comparison of specified and achieved parameters (e.g. power, frequency, operation regimes, efficiency, etc.)

· A comparison of specified and achieved scheduled milestones and delivery dates. Identify which subcontractor(s) supplied which key component(s) on these prior projects and which of these subcontractors are included in the current proposal.

· Provide a minimum of three customer references of comparable power amplifier systems, including the name of the organization, contacts, phone numbers, and e-mail addresses.

B. Key Project Personnel (5) Supply the resumes/vitae of all key project personnel such as the Project Manager and Lead RF Engineer for all major components. This shall also include key personnel of subcontractors.

· The vitae should focus on pertinent experience in the design, manufacturing, assembling, and testing of comparable power amplifier systems. In particular, for all key personnel, their engineering tools and their years of experience utilizing them must be identified. Demonstrate the organizational capability to supplement key personnel skill sets if required by the project.

Evaluation Method for Tab 4 A. The Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated as to how recent, frequent, and how successful the past production has been, including (but not limited to) technical and schedule performance.

B. The Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated as to the range and depth of the key project personnel, resources available, their experience and how it relates to this project.

4.2.5 Tab 5 – MANUFACTURING CAPABILITIES (INCLUDING KEY SUBCONTRACTORS (15 Points)

A. Program Management, Manufacturing, and Installation Plan (7 Points)

· Describe how you plan to manage this project. Expand on your organizational chart, lines of responsibility, work breakdown structure, scheduling, and meetings.

· Provide a manufacturing plan that identifies the type of resources, including a list of key subcontractors, required to support the project. This plan should include, but not be limited to, a project milestone schedule consistent with the schedule in the SOW. Discuss how you will achieve and support the design and manufacturing plan submitted and discuss schedule risks and opportunities to improve the schedule. Identify long lead-time items and describe their makeup. Provide a basis for your estimate of schedule contingency.

B. Production Facility Description (8 Points) Describe your available production facilities and capabilities, including but not limited to:

· Clear identification of all production facilities, including sub-contractors. Provide information about how and where manufacturing will take place, and a description (with photos) of the manufacturing facility with applicable equipment.

Evaluation Method for Tab 5 A. The Offeror’s organization and plan will be evaluated as to whether it can realistically meet the schedule and the production can be carried out effectively. The manufacturing method will be evaluated against techniques known to be successful.

B. The Offeror’s facilities will be evaluated as to whether they support the proposed production plan.

4.2.6 Tab 6 Quality Assurance (QA) (10 points)

The Offeror shall provide objective evidence that a quality assurance program has been developed and implemented within their organization. This includes the submittal of an approved QA program/manual and a list of implementing procedures which describes the QA program and a current organizational chart showing the link between Quality personnel and management.

A. Tab 6-a: Current Quality System Describe the current quality system, provide a copy of the latest quality manual, and:

· Identify if it is ISO 9001 certified/registered and provide a copy of the certificate. In addition, provide the ISO registrar’s website address, along with the name, title, telephone number and email address of a responsible person to contact.

· If not ISO 9001 certified/ registered but the company meets the requirements of ISO 9001, explain in detail how.

· If not ISO 9001 certified or compliant, explain in detail the quality system in place.

· Management review of audit results, corrective and preventative action data, and analysis of failure modes.

· Organizational chart showing Quality Assurance group and their link to management.

C. Tab 6-c: Manufacturing System/Procedures Describe the procedure for releasing work to the shop floor and provide a completed shop traveler that was used in a recent, similar project.

D. Tab 6-d: Supplier Quality Assurance Describe the Quality Assurance group’s role in the procurement process. Explain how applicable customer QA requirements are flowed down to your suppliers and sub-tier suppliers.

· Master file, where all released drawings are stored.

· Change control procedure for approval, incorporation and release of design changes.

· System for creation and control of parts lists and bills of material.

· Process for controlling shop floor travelers, and manufacturing and test procedures.

F. Tab 6-f: Calibration System Describe the calibration system for measuring and test equipment, including: equipment identification, calibration procedures, traceability of standards to national standards, calibration intervals, and recall system.

G. Tab 6-g: Procedures for Controlling Nonconforming Material Describe the procedure for controlling nonconforming material, including: identification/ tagging, segregation from the production area, documenting and reporting, Material Review Board (MRB) process, inspection and test after rework/repair, and corrective/preventive action.

Evaluation Method for Tab 6

The Offeror will be evaluated as to how adequate, well-documented, and well-implemented the current quality procedures and processes are, and how they meet the quality requirements defined in the SOW.

4.3 Price Proposal -Volume 2

Provide one (1) written e-mail copy of the price portion of your proposal and any amendments thereto. Do not include the Technical Proposal in this volume. Volume 2 should be prepared simply, be legible, clear, coherent, and in accordance with the tabs noted below:

4.3.1 Tab A: - Corporate Profile and Financial Capability

Provide a corporate profile of your organization. Include your three (3) most recent audited financial statements/yearly reports. Such reports for any parent organization shall also be included. If a joint venture is proposed, the above is required of all parties.

Also, in order to support DOE reporting requirements, BSA requires all its vendors/contractors to be registered in the U. S. Government supplier database entitled System For Award Management (SAM). It is suggested that registration be performed on line at www.sam.gov prior to the submission date of this RFP. If you, in fact, have done so, provide a definitive statement herein that your firm has registered in the U. S. Government supplier database entitled System For Award Management (SAM) at www.sam.gov.

4.3.2 Tab B: - Draft Contract with Terms and Conditions

The Draft Contract with Terms and Conditions is provided in Enclosure (1). The Offeror shall clearly note its acceptance in full. The successful Offeror will be required to execute a Contract in accordance with the provisions of the Draft Contract. Any exceptions shall be noted accordingly, however, the Offeror shall not construe noted exceptions, if any, to be accepted by BSA.

4.3.3 Tab C: - Price / Milestone Schedule

The Offeror shall provide pricing information in strict accordance with this RFP. Any exceptions should be noted accordingly. All change/options, if offered, must be submitted as an alternate proposal in addition to the pricing requirements as stated in this RFP (Enclosure 4 – AMS-Form-043), however, the Offeror shall not construe noted exceptions, if any, to be accepted by BSA.

Note: Only pricing in U.S. dollars will be accepted.

4.3.4 Tab D: Delivery

The Offeror shall clearly note its acceptance in full of the proposed delivery schedule as set forth in the Enclosure 1, Draft Contract. Any exceptions shall be noted accordingly, however, the Offeror shall not construe noted exceptions, if any, to be accepted by BSA.

4.3.5 Tab E: Payment Terms and Freight (if applicable)

Payment terms shall be FOB (Free on Board) destination, “DAP” Delivered At Place. Net 30 from acceptance, in accordance with an agreed-to milestone schedule.

Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, Long Island, New York (Freight Prepaid)

Thomas Jefferson National Laboratory, Newport News, Virginia (Freight Prepaid)

200kW Amplifier Systems to be shipped to JLAB and 400kW Amplifier Systems to be shipped to BNL.

[When applicable] (For foreign procurements the prospective Offeror will be responsible for notifying Inter-freight Harmonized Logistics Inc., located at 221 Sheridan Blvd, Inwood, New York. For foreign shipments that will be transported via ocean freight the 10-2 REQUIREMENTS Form located at http://www.bnl.gov/ppm/linkable_files/pdf/TenTwoForm.pdf must be completed by the Offeror 72 hours before departure of the vessel. The form can either be faxed to Inter-freight Harmonized Logistics, Inc. at 516-371-6880 or emailed to bnl@interfreight.net. A copy should also be emailed to PPMTraffic@BNL.gov. Once the form is submitted to customs an acceptance number will be given. No freight will be loaded on a vessel without this acceptance number.)

The Offeror shall review and clearly note its acceptance in full. Any exceptions shall be noted accordingly.

4.3.6 Tab F: Small Business Subcontracting Plan

All Offerors certifying that they are other than a “small business or foreign business” and that they expect to submit an offer that will exceed $750,000 must submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan for BSA’s approval prior to contract award. Reference shall be made to FAR 52.219-9 before completing this subcontracting plan. Firms certifying that they are small or foreign businesses need not complete the plan. The following BSA small business stretch goals are provided as an example for this procurement. Any exceptions to this requirement shall be noted accordingly.

The Offeror shall complete and return the following forms:

1. AMS Form 050 Annual Representations & Certifications (Enclosure 2)

4.3.8 Tab H: Government Property

Tab H-1: Government Property Currently Possessed The Offeror shall provide a description of any contemplated use of Government property that is currently in the possession of the Offeror. Provide the name and point of contact of the cognizant Government Contracting Officer. Any proposed use of Government-owned equipment/facilities will be evaluated to negate any competitive advantage. If there is no Government property the Offeror shall so note.

Tab H-2: Contractor-Acquired Government Property (To be included when requesting other than FFP proposal) The Offeror shall submit a list of any/all Contractor-acquired Government property that is planned to be purchased with any funding provided under any resultant Contract.

5.1 Type of Procurement

This is a “Best Value” procurement. BSA intends to award a contract resulting from this RFP to the responsive, responsible Offeror whose proposal represents the Best Value after evaluation in accordance with the evaluation factors, subfactors, and price as noted in this RFP. The utilization of this procedure is expected to provide the greatest overall benefit to BSA. Best Value employs a trade-off process that permits award to other than the lowest priced Offeror or to the highest technically rated Offeror. The trade-off process associated with Best Value involves a comparative weighing of the evaluation factors and subfactors identified in the RFP. Specifically, the trade-off process involves selecting the most advantageous offer based on an integrated assessment of both technical factors and price. Price will not be rated or scored but will be a factor in the Best Value analysis. All factors and subfactors, when combined, are significantly more important than price.

An award may be made without discussion or negotiation of proposals received; therefore, proposals should be submitted on the most favorable terms which can be submitted in response to this request. BSA reserves the right to conduct pre-selection site visits to assess the Offerors’ capabilities, to hold fact-finding discussions, and/or to negotiate with any one or all of the Offerors on any aspect of this RFP prior to making an award, or to make an award without further discussion or negotiation at any time during this process. BSA may request such supplementary information as determined sufficient, in the opinion of BSA, to assure that an Offeror’s technical competence, business and technical organization, facilities, and financial resources are adequate to successfully perform the contemplated work. BSA reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, or to accept any proposal. BSA will not be obligated to award all or any part of the work solicited, and in any event will not be responsible for the Offeror’s cost of proposal preparation or any other cost incurred in connection with this RFP.

5.2 Methodology

It is the practice of BSA, in making an overall evaluation of qualifications and proposals received, to establish a Source Selection Board (SSB) that will evaluate the qualifications and proposals to enable due consideration to performance and price. The final evaluation assessment is derived from the composite reviews. As explained previously, this procedure is intended to result in Phase 1 with the top three technically ranked Teams, and in Phase 2 the selection of the most advantageous proposal, considering price in determining the Best Value trade-off.

5.2.1 Qualifications from all Offerors will initially be point-scored by voting team members of the SSB in accordance with the evaluation factors and sub-factors described in section 4.2. Phase 1 evaluations will be used to short-list the top three technically ranked Teams. Phase 2 submissions, short-listed Teams only, will be initially evaluated on responsiveness to the RFP requirements in all aspects. The price proposals will not be scored.

The tradeoff process permits tradeoffs among price and non-price factors (i.e., technical factors) and allows BSA to accept other than the lowest-priced proposal, or the highest technically rated Offeror. Under a trade-off process, the perceived technical benefits of the higher-priced proposal shall merit the additional cost to receive award. In conducting the trade-off analysis for this procurement, the technical factors, when combined, are more important than price. Offerors are advised, however, that as the range of the overall technical scores among Offerors narrows, the more important price will become in making the award decision. An independent estimate, historical pricing data, and competitive pricing will be used in the consideration and analysis of price.

5.3 Technical Evaluation Criteria

Each proposal will be evaluated based on how well it meets or exceeds the requirements of this RFP. The proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the following evaluation criteria, listed in order of importance, and more fully explained in Section 4 above:

1. Design and Technical Capabilities (50 points)

2. Prior experience and past performance producing comparable Power Amplifier Systems (including subcontractors). (25 points)

3. Manufacturing Capabilities (including key subcontractors) (15 Points)

4. Quality Assurance (10 Points)

Each Offeror’s strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies will be addressed accordingly in each resultant technical evaluation.

To be considered technically responsive to the RFP, each Offeror must score a total of (60) points out of the proposal overall 100 points possible. Any proposal that fails to achieve this parameter shall be deemed technically non-responsive and will be excluded from further evaluation.

5.4 Final Selection Process

After completion of discussions with Offerors and after receipt of Best and Final offers (if required), the SSB will recommend the “Best Value” Offeror to the SSO. The recommendation will be based on the evaluation of technical capabilities of the Offerors and the prices being offered. The SSO will subsequently use all Source Evaluation analysis and evaluations as guidelines in making the final selection.

5.5 Basis of Award

Award of the resulting contract will be based on the SSO’s evaluation of the SSB’s recommendation and will be made to the Offeror whose proposal represents the overall Best Value.

6.0 PERFORMANCE AND FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

It is understood that any contract resulting from this request shall be on the basis that the Offeror who undertakes the work represents and guarantees that it possesses the necessary skills, means of performance, and financial resources to complete the effort. Inability to perform, including loss of key personnel or facilities, will not excuse default.

7.0 CLOSURE

BSA believes the information contained herein is sufficient to permit you to prepare a complete and definitive proposal; however, should there be any questions, please contact the undersigned. All questions must be submitted in writing via e-mail. Replies to questions will be provided in writing and, if considered to be of general interest, will be transmitted to all other Offerors. If for any reason you are unable to submit a proposal, kindly reply in writing and return this letter with all the attachments.

Sincerely, William Koncelik

William Koncelik Contracts Administrator, C.P.M

Enclosure 1 – BSA Draft Contract Enclosure 2 – AMS Form 050, Annual Representations and Certifications Enclosure 3 – AMS Form 043, Proposal Pricing Sheet image1.png